From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@kernel.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch v3] mm, page_alloc: reintroduce page allocation stall warning
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2026 09:44:30 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a65dc09d-f181-adc8-59d5-838b6a2b7c9e@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <69cb3957.5d0a0220.93499.af4cSMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com>
On Mon, 30 Mar 2026, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> > Previously, we had warnings when a single page allocation took longer
> > than reasonably expected. This was introduced in commit 63f53dea0c98
> > ("mm: warn about allocations which stall for too long").
> >
> > The warning was subsequently reverted in commit 400e22499dd9 ("mm: don't
> > warn about allocations which stall for too long") because it was possible
> > to generate memory pressure that would effectively stall further progress
> > through printk execution.
> >
> > Page allocation stalls in excess of 10 seconds are always useful to debug
> > because they can result in severe userspace unresponsiveness. Adding
> > this artifact can be used to correlate with userspace going out to lunch
> > and to understand the state of memory at the time.
> >
> > There should be a reasonable expectation that this warning will never
> > trigger given it is very passive, it will only be emitted when a page
> > allocation takes longer than 10 seconds. If it does trigger, this
> > reveals an issue that should be fixed: a single page allocation should
> > never loop for more than 10 seconds without oom killing to make memory
> > available.
> >
> > Unlike the original implementation, this implementation only reports
> > stalls once for the system every 10 seconds. Otherwise, many concurrent
> > reclaimers could spam the kernel log unnecessarily. Stalls are only
> > reported when calling into direct reclaim.
> >
> > Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) <vbabka@kernel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
>
> I am hoping that the reason you are reintroducing these warnings is
> because you already are seeing such cases in your production
> environment. Do you have anything interesting to share?
>
We don't have this patch in our production environment (yet). We've
been stress testing allocations for page faults with lots of concurrent
skb allocations that can keep us persistently below the per-zone min
watermarks and hope that this patch will shed some light on some
unresponsiveness issues that we've encountered if/when it happens.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-31 16:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-22 3:03 [RFC] " David Rientjes
2026-03-22 20:28 ` David Rientjes
2026-03-23 14:24 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-03-24 1:06 ` David Rientjes
2026-03-23 16:53 ` Michal Hocko
2026-03-24 1:13 ` David Rientjes
2026-03-24 8:05 ` Petr Mladek
2026-03-23 19:05 ` Andrew Morton
2026-03-30 1:08 ` [patch] " David Rientjes
2026-03-30 3:17 ` Andrew Morton
2026-03-30 14:06 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-03-30 13:54 ` Michal Hocko
2026-03-30 15:13 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-03-30 22:34 ` David Rientjes
2026-03-30 15:00 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-03-30 22:42 ` [patch v2] " David Rientjes
2026-03-31 1:20 ` [patch v3] " David Rientjes
2026-03-31 3:02 ` Shakeel Butt
2026-03-31 7:54 ` Michal Hocko
[not found] ` <69cb3957.5d0a0220.93499.af4cSMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com>
2026-03-31 16:44 ` David Rientjes [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=a65dc09d-f181-adc8-59d5-838b6a2b7c9e@google.com \
--to=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=jackmanb@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=pmladek@suse.com \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox